DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/24/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed 04/20/2026 is entered.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 11-13, and 20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 1, filed 04/20/2026, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous 112(b) rejections have been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 1-4, filed 04/20/2026, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous 101 rejections have been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 4-7, filed 04/20/2026, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant appears to argue that Roberts teaches away from increasing velocity resolution during the first operational mode because Roberts teaches a system that decreases scanning rates to conserve power. Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that Roberts discloses both a lower scan rate when the car engine is off and a higher scan rate when the engine is on ([0055]: “when the vehicle engine is turned off, multiple preliminary radar scans may be performed at a relatively lower scanning rate to conserve battery power. When the engine is turned on and the vehicle is still stationary, the radar sensor 109 may draw power from the engine and any radar scans may be performed at one or more relatively higher scanning rates.”). Additionally, Claim 3 of Roberts recites performing the preliminary scan at a higher scan rate.
Applicant appears to argue that Roberts makes it unclear whether the higher scan rate described in paragraph [0055] pertains to preliminary scans. Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that paragraph [0055] states that the higher scan rate can apply to “any radar scans.” Additionally, Claim 3 of Roberts resolves any ambiguity: “if the engine is running, control operation of the radar sensor to perform the at least one preliminary scan at a second scan rate greater than the first scan rate” (Claim 3).
Applicant appears to argue that it is unclear whether the higher scan rate increases velocity resolution. Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that the higher scan rate results in more samples of a target’s position, which increases the estimation accuracy of the target’s velocity. Additionally, Roberts paragraph [0033] states: “more than one radar sensor may also be used in different sensor configurations (for example, to increase the resolution of the system)” and paragraph [0056] states: “Preliminary scan(s) may be performed at a scanning rate commensurate with reliable detection of occupants,” which is the same functional purpose of the claimed velocity resolution increase.
Applicant appears to argue that Roberts paragraph [0102] uses an occupant count derived from the pre-movement scan rather than the preliminary scan, and therefore does not teach using the occupant count from the first mode as input to the second mode. Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts the Roberts paragraph [0100] explicitly states that the preliminary scan phase (blocks 1010-1026) determines the number of occupants in the vehicle and that “This number may be employed in controlling further operations of the vehicle as described herein, after the movement control command is received.” Paragraph [0102] then explains that after the movement control command is received, the sensor control module uses “the number of occupants currently in the interior” to determine if an excessive seat occupant condition exists.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding Claims 12-20, the claims recite contingent limitations (e.g., “when at least one vehicle door is open” and “when no vehicle doors are open” in Claim 12, and “when the occupant count is inconsistent” in Claim 20). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. See MPEP 211.04 II.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C.
102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the
statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a
new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection,
would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness
rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the
claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the
differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the
claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which
the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in
which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 7, 12-13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Roberts (US 2022/0388525) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Roberts (US 2022/0388525) in view of Peng (US 2021/0293948).
Regarding Claim 1, Roberts discloses:
A seat occupancy sensor system for a vehicle ([0003]: “number of occupants”), comprising:
at least one seat occupancy sensor configured to receive radio frequency (RF) signals within a passenger cabin of the vehicle ([0003]: “radar sensor”); and
a seat occupancy control module in communication with the seat occupancy sensor ([0003]: “sensor control module”), wherein the seat occupancy control module is configured to operate the seat occupancy sensor system in first and second operational modes ([0003]: “preliminary scan”; “pre-movement scan”),
when at least one vehicle door is open, the seat occupancy control module is configured to operate the seat occupancy sensor system according to the first operational mode so that RF signals are used to determine an occupant count and keep track of vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin ([0003]: “while one or more doors of the vehicle are open, automatically control operation of the radar sensor to perform at least one preliminary scan of a portion of an interior of the vehicle”; “determine, using information acquired by the at least one preliminary scan of the vehicle interior, a number of occupants currently in the vehicle”; [0054]: “The preliminary scan(s) may be directed to determining and tracking a number of occupants”), and
when no vehicle doors are open, the seat occupancy control module is configured to operate the seat occupancy sensor system according to the second operational mode so that RF signals are used to detect and distinguish vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin ([0003]: “repeat the preliminary scanning operation and the determination of the number of occupants until all doors of the vehicle are closed”; “The sensor control module is configured to determine, using information acquired by the pre-movement scan, if an excessive occupant condition exists in the vehicle interior.”; [0057]: “The pre-movement scan may be a final scan performed before the vehicle moves, to determine the seating status of the vehicle occupants.”), wherein the seat occupancy control module is configured to increase a velocity resolution of the seat occupancy sensor for the first operational mode in order to accurately keep track of the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin ([0055]: “the radar sensor 109 may draw power from the engine and any radar scans may be performed at one or more relatively higher scanning rates.”; [0056]: “Preliminary scan(s) may be performed at a scanning rate commensurate with reliable detection of occupants entering and leaving the vehicle interior”), and the seat occupancy control module is configured to use the occupant count from the first operational mode as an input to the second operational mode ([0100]: “This number may be employed in controlling further operations of the vehicle as described herein, after the movement control command is received.”; [0102]: “The sensor control module 117 may then (in block 1036), using the number of occupants currently in the interior and the number of seats, determine of an excessive seat occupant condition exists.”).
Alternatively, Regarding Claim 1, Roberts teaches the elements of Claim 1 as set forth above.
Peng teaches: increasing a velocity resolution of the seat occupancy sensor in order to accurately keep track of the vehicle occupants (Peng [0055]: “transmission characteristics of the chirps 306 (e.g., bandwidth, center frequency, duration, and transmit power) can be tailored to achieve a particular detection range, range resolution, or Doppler coverage for detecting the living object 108.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and increase the velocity resolution of the seat occupancy sensor in order to accurately keep track of the vehicle occupants, as taught by Peng. It is well-known in the art the chirp transmission characteristics, such as chirp duration, can be adjusted to improve Doppler coverage, which corresponds to velocity resolution. Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Peng comprises applying a known technique to a known device to yield predictable results (improved occupancy detection).
Regarding Claim 12, Roberts discloses:
A method of using a seat occupancy sensor system for a vehicle, the system comprising at least one seat occupancy sensor configured to receive radio frequency (RF) signals within a passenger cabin of the vehicle and a seat occupancy control module in communication with the seat occupancy sensor ([0003]: “radar sensor”; “sensor control module”), the method comprising the steps of:
receiving a door status signal at the seat occupancy control module indicating a state of one or more vehicle door(s) ([0032]: “door sensors 185 configured to detect open and closed conditions of each vehicle door”; [0097]);
selecting a first operational mode or a second operational mode with the seat occupancy control module based, at least partially, on the state of the vehicle door(s) ([0003]: “preliminary scan”; “pre-movement scan”);
when at least one vehicle door is open, operating the seat occupancy sensor system according to the first operational mode by using RF signals to determine an occupant count to keep track of vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin ([0003]: “while one or more doors of the vehicle are open, automatically control operation of the radar sensor to perform at least one preliminary scan of a portion of an interior of the vehicle”; “determine, using information acquired by the at least one preliminary scan of the vehicle interior, a number of occupants currently in the vehicle”; [0054]: “The preliminary scan(s) may be directed to determining and tracking a number of occupants”); and
when no vehicle doors are open, operating the seat occupancy sensor system according to the second operational mode by using RF signals to detect and distinguish vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin ([0003]: “repeat the preliminary scanning operation and the determination of the number of occupants until all doors of the vehicle are closed”; “The sensor control module is configured to determine, using information acquired by the pre-movement scan, if an excessive occupant condition exists in the vehicle interior.”; [0057]: “The pre-movement scan may be a final scan performed before the vehicle moves, to determine the seating status of the vehicle occupants.”), wherein the seat occupancy control module increases a velocity resolution of the seat occupancy sensor for the first operational mode in order to accurately keep track of the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin ([0055]: “the radar sensor 109 may draw power from the engine and any radar scans may be performed at one or more relatively higher scanning rates.”; [0056]: “Preliminary scan(s) may be performed at a scanning rate commensurate with reliable detection of occupants entering and leaving the vehicle interior”), and the seat occupancy control module uses the occupant count from the first operational mode as an input to the second operational mode ([0100]: “This number may be employed in controlling further operations of the vehicle as described herein, after the movement control command is received.”; [0102]: “The sensor control module 117 may then (in block 1036), using the number of occupants currently in the interior and the number of seats, determine of an excessive seat occupant condition exists.”).
Alternatively, Regarding Claim 12, Roberts teaches the elements of Claim 12 as set forth above.
Peng teaches: increasing a velocity resolution of the seat occupancy sensor in order to accurately keep track of the vehicle occupants (Peng [0055]: “transmission characteristics of the chirps 306 (e.g., bandwidth, center frequency, duration, and transmit power) can be tailored to achieve a particular detection range, range resolution, or Doppler coverage for detecting the living object 108.”).
The rationale to modify Roberts with the teachings of Peng persists from Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Roberts discloses: wherein the seat occupancy control module is configured to receive a door status signal that indicates a state of one or more vehicle door(s) and to select between the first and second operational modes based, at least partially, on the state of the vehicle door(s) ([0032]: “door sensors 185 configured to detect open and closed conditions of each vehicle door”; [0097]: “When a vehicle door is opened, the sensor control module 117 may (in block 1014) control operation of the radar sensor to perform a preliminary scan of the vehicle interior.”; “In addition, the sensor control module 117 may (in block 1018) determine if all open vehicle door(s) are closed.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Roberts discloses: wherein the at least one seat occupancy sensor is a configurable RADAR sensor with one or more setting(s) that can be used to adjust range resolution, velocity resolution and/or angular resolution, and the seat occupancy control module is configured to adjust the setting(s) of the seat occupancy sensor based on the operational mode ([0033]: “more than one radar sensor may also be used in different sensor configurations (for example, to increase the resolution of the system).”; [0056]: “Preliminary scan(s) may be performed at a scanning rate commensurate with reliable detection of occupants entering and leaving the vehicle interior”).
Regarding Claims 4 and 13, Roberts discloses: wherein, during the first operational mode when at least one vehicle door is open, the seat occupancy control module is configured to increase the velocity resolution of the seat occupancy sensor by adjusting one or more chirp parameter(s) and/or implementing one or more signal processing technique(s) in order to accurately keep track of the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin ([0055]: “radar scans may be performed at one or more relatively higher scanning rates”; [Claim 3]).
Regarding Claims 7 and 16, Roberts discloses: wherein, during the second operational mode when no vehicle doors are open, the seat occupancy control module is configured to increase a range resolution and/or an angular resolution of the seat occupancy sensor by adjusting one or more chirp parameter(s) and/or implementing one or more signal processing technique(s) in order to accurately detect and distinguish vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin ([0055]: “the radar sensor 109 may draw power from the engine and any radar scans may be performed at one or more relatively higher scanning rates.”).
Claims 5, 8, 10, 14, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roberts (US 2022/0388525) in view of Peng (US 2021/0293948).
Regarding Claims 5 and 14, Roberts teaches: … during the first operational mode when at least one vehicle door is open, the seat occupancy control module … ([0003]; [0054]).
Roberts does not explicitly teach – but Peng teaches: wherein … the … control module is configured to adjust the one or more chirp parameter(s) by increasing a chirp duration to improve the accuracy of velocity measurements pertaining to the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin (Peng [0055]: “transmission characteristics of the chirps 306 (e.g., bandwidth, center frequency, duration, and transmit power) can be tailored to achieve a particular detection range, range resolution, or Doppler coverage for detecting the living object 108.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and configure the seat occupancy control module to increase a chirp duration to improve the accuracy of velocity measurements pertaining to the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin, as taught by Peng. It is well-known in the art that increasing chirp duration improves velocity resolution. Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Peng comprises applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claims 8 and 17, Roberts teaches: … during the second operational mode when no vehicle doors are open, the seat occupancy control module … ([0003]; [0057]).
Roberts does not explicitly teach – but Peng teaches: wherein … the … control module is configured to adjust the one or more chirp parameter(s) by increasing a chirp bandwidth and/or a chirp rate to improve the accuracy of range measurements pertaining to seated vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin (Peng [0055]: “transmission characteristics of the chirps 306 (e.g., bandwidth, center frequency, duration, and transmit power) can be tailored to achieve a particular detection range, range resolution, or Doppler coverage for detecting the living object 108.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and configure the seat occupancy control module to increase a chirp bandwidth and/or a chirp rate to improve the accuracy of range measurements pertaining to seated vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin, as taught by Peng. It is well-known in the art that increasing chirp bandwidth and/or rate improves range resolution. Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Peng comprises applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claims 10 and 19, Roberts teaches: … during the second operational mode when no vehicle doors are open, the seat occupancy control module … ([0003]; [0057]).
Roberts does not explicitly teach – but Peng teaches: wherein … the … control module is configured to implement the following signal processing technique: digital beamforming to improve the accuracy of angular measurements pertaining to seated vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin (Peng [0042]: “To achieve object angular accuracies and angular resolutions, the receiving antenna elements can be used to generate hundreds of narrow steered beams with digital beamforming.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and perform digital beamforming to improve the accuracy of angular measurements pertaining to seated vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin, as taught by Peng. It is well-known in the art that digital beamforming improves angular resolution. Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Peng comprises applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claims 6, 9, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roberts (US 2022/0388525) in view of Smith (US 6,798,374).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, Roberts teaches: … during the first operational mode when at least one vehicle door is open, the seat occupancy control module … ([0003]; [0054]).
Roberts does not explicitly teach – but Smith teaches: wherein … the … control module is configured to implement one or more of the following signal processing technique(s): increasing a fast Fourier transform (FFT) size and/or applying a windowing function to improve the accuracy of velocity measurements pertaining to the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin (Smith [col. 5, lines 57-58]: “Increasing the FFT size can improve the frequency resolution of each target.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and increasing a fast Fourier transform (FFT) size to improve the accuracy of velocity measurements pertaining to the vehicle occupants entering and/or exiting the passenger cabin, as taught by Smith. Increasing the FFT size is beneficial for improving frequency resolution, thereby improving the accuracy of velocity measurements. Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Smith comprises applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claims 9 and 18, Roberts teaches: … during the second operational mode when no vehicle doors are open, the seat occupancy control module … ([0003]; [0057]).
Roberts does not explicitly teach – but Smith teaches: wherein … the … control module is configured to implement one or more of the following signal processing technique(s): applying pulse compression techniques to better utilize a chirp bandwidth, increasing a fast Fourier transform (FFT) size and/or applying a windowing function to improve the accuracy of range measurements pertaining to seated vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin (Smith [col. 5, lines 57-58]: “Increasing the FFT size can improve the frequency resolution of each target.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and increasing a fast Fourier transform (FFT) size to improve the accuracy of velocity measurements pertaining to the vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin, as taught by Smith. Increasing the FFT size is beneficial for improving frequency resolution, thereby improving the accuracy of velocity measurements. Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Smith comprises applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Claims 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roberts (US 2022/0388525) in view of Christopher (US 2013/0093617).
Regarding Claims 11 and 20, Roberts teaches: … the seat occupancy control module … ([0003]).
Roberts does not explicitly teach – but Christopher teaches: wherein the … control module is configured to use the occupant count from the first operational mode to verify results of the second operational mode (Christopher [0005]: “first scan”; “consecutive scans”; “comparing the predicted positions and measured positions”; [0023]: “new measurements are compared with the predictions of previously (on past scans) formed tracks”), and to again detect and distinguish vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin when the occupant count is inconsistent with the results of the second operational mode (Christopher [0005]: “repeating (a)-(e) until a preselected process condition is met, and determining the true targets based on the results of the comparisons”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Roberts and use the occupant count from the first operational mode to verify the results of the second operational mode, and to again detect and distinguish vehicle occupants in the passenger cabin when the occupant count is inconsistent with the results of the second operational mode, as taught by Christopher. Using the results of the first mode to verify the results of the second mode, and performing an additional detection when the results do not agree is beneficial for resolving radar ambiguities (Christopher [0004-0005]). Modifying Roberts with the teachings of Christopher comprises combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH Y. ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-0170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-4PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William J. Kelleher can be reached on (571) 272-7753. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NOAH YI MIN ZHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights